July 13, 2013

McArdle is serious, and so it begins

When I saw this yesterday, from the libertarian pundit and prominent columnist and psychotics-gang-rushing Megan McArdle, I thought it was just one of those stylistic exaggerations to which we bloggers are prone, thus any counter-blogging ridicule of it would look even sillier:

As I understand it, there is about a 0% chance that Democrats will retake the House in 2014.... Meanwhile, there’s about a 70% chance that Republicans will control the White House, the House, and the Senate come January 2017.

But it seems that others took her seriously, and by God she was serious. In a follow-up, even-sunnier-but-there's-a-10%-chance-of-fallibility post, McArdle prattles: "My assertion that there’s a 70% chance that the GOP controls White House, Senate, and House in 2017 has attracted a lot of pushback. And it’s certainly possible that I’m wrong!"

So naturally she ups the 70% chance to 75%. If the former received "pushback," the latter should ensure a thunderous disapprobation; thus, even more naturally, cable-news network invitations.

She proceeds, "Here’s my thinking, for what it’s worth"--and, much like Voltaire's quip about the Holy Roman Empire (it's neither holy nor Roman nor an empire), one observes in what follows a wholesale absence of either thought or worth. You think I'm exaggerating? Go ahead, read it yourself.

OK, so mine are nothing but cheap and easy shots, right? Right. Yet there's a larger observation to be drawn from McArdle's onanistic fantasy: Egads, or praise be, the rambling revolutionaries of Beaver Cleaver revanchism are already sliding into triumphalist delusions.

Comments

McArdle is serious, and so it begins

When I saw this yesterday, from the libertarian pundit and prominent columnist and psychotics-gang-rushing Megan McArdle, I thought it was just one of those stylistic exaggerations to which we bloggers are prone, thus any counter-blogging ridicule of it would look even sillier:

As I understand it, there is about a 0% chance that Democrats will retake the House in 2014.... Meanwhile, there’s about a 70% chance that Republicans will control the White House, the House, and the Senate come January 2017.

But it seems that others took her seriously, and by God she was serious. In a follow-up, even-sunnier-but-there's-a-10%-chance-of-fallibility post, McArdle prattles: "My assertion that there’s a 70% chance that the GOP controls White House, Senate, and House in 2017 has attracted a lot of pushback. And it’s certainly possible that I’m wrong!"

So naturally she ups the 70% chance to 75%. If the former received "pushback," the latter should ensure a thunderous disapprobation; thus, even more naturally, cable-news network invitations.

She proceeds, "Here’s my thinking, for what it’s worth"--and, much like Voltaire's quip about the Holy Roman Empire (it's neither holy nor Roman nor an empire), one observes in what follows a wholesale absence of either thought or worth. You think I'm exaggerating? Go ahead, read it yourself.

OK, so mine are nothing but cheap and easy shots, right? Right. Yet there's a larger observation to be drawn from McArdle's onanistic fantasy: Egads, or praise be, the rambling revolutionaries of Beaver Cleaver revanchism are already sliding into triumphalist delusions.